legacyme3, not only are you playing suspiciously for reasons already pointed out, but your defensive argument seems almost intentionally weak as well.

It seems to me that you want to be killed off. If you turn out to be a Mafia member or a Thug, then I would be very suspicious of some the people who have been pressing for your death up to this point.

If not, then we should at least send the message that people shouldn't make such accusations at the drop of a hat. We have to be skeptical of every accusation made, so it's best if we don't spend our time second guessing everyone each and every time somebody makes one on a whim.

That one is my fault. Usually it's 3 choices + nokill, but instead of writing "*Unassigned*" I left it out. As such, I'll let the vote for TRS pass, because it should have been made more clear that a third vote was allowed.

legacyme3
"In short, legacyme3 does horrible things to people, and I don't think anyone else on Jul should be exposed to him, no matter how decent of a person he pretends to be."

Originally posted by The Red SnifitIt seems to me that you want to be killed off. If you turn out to be a Mafia member or a Thug, then I would be very suspicious of some the people who have been pressing for your death up to this point.

I think this is showing some of your mafia rust... no worries though.

I think it's ridiculous I have so many votes for making an accusation based on something I read, and made a quick decision about.

Originally posted by GirlydragonSo, if being dangerous is that bad, then I think that YOU The Red Snifit is far more dangerous by doing what could only be deemed as preaching silence.

I am not preaching silence. I am preaching reason.

If our players can't be bothered to come up with a good reason for their accusations while everybody jumps on them anyway, then we are in a situation where chaos is supreme and manipulation by the Mafia is inevitable.

Action is good, but if we don't take this seriously, we'll all be played for fools.

Originally posted by GirlydragonYou guys are voting for legacy because he's "dangerous"? Because he's willing to throw around a few accusations?

I think you're completely missing the point here, bro.

I'm barely holding his original "joke" accusation on him. No, no, I'm wondering about the questionably quick decisions, along with his weak defensive arguments.

If we were ousting for being "dangerous", you'd be the one being accused. You've made the most edgy accusations, along with throwing back that Red's plead for everyone to "slow down" is "a Mafia tactic". You've made some of the weakest arguments so far, but I haven't said anything about it because I'm willing to listen to those who speak, as long as they think first.

As a rebuttal, I question why you're defending legacyme3 so strongly and counter-accusing the people who are trying to get an answer out of him. I also question why you stepped over my huge post about timestamps and instead insisted that we're killing him because he's "dangerous" and we obviously have no reasons other than that. It's just a question, though, so you don't have to answer - although I'd definitely recommend it

Originally posted by The Red SnifitI am not preaching silence. I am preaching reason.

If our players can't be bothered to come up with a good reason for their accusations while everybody jumps on them anyway, then we are in a situation where chaos is supreme and manipulation by the Mafia is inevitable.

Action is good, but if we don't take this seriously, we'll all be played for fools.

I can only guess that we draw the line for what is reason differently then. I think that so far most accusations is definitely withing reason, maybe aside from the one silverthundr made with actually nothing to say about it, but he backed it up with some stuff later on.

Originally posted by BlueWhirlIf we were ousting for being "dangerous", you'd be the one being accused. You've made the most edgy accusations, along with throwing back that Red's plead for everyone to "slow down" is "a Mafia tactic". You've made some of the weakest arguments so far, but I haven't said anything about it because I'm willing to listen to those who speak, as long as they think first.

I can safely tell you, and will stand by my choice to say that trying to hold back on the flow of information in this game is a very good Mafia tactic, if it's succeeds that is. Even if TRS meant well with his accusation the risk is high that the aura of the game would become that of Accusing = Death. And we wouldn't like that.

Originally posted by BlueWhirlAs a rebuttal, I question why you're defending legacyme3 so strongly and counter-accusing the people who are trying to get an answer out of him. I also question why you stepped over my huge post about timestamps and instead insisted that we're killing him because he's "dangerous" and we obviously have no reasons other than that. It's just a question, though, so you don't have to answer - although I'd definitely recommend it

I stepped over it because I found it just plain meh.

You say he had 30 seconds, think about it.

11:35:23 was my post. His edit was made sometime in the time frame of 11:36.

That could possibly mean 11:36:59.

That'd be 1 minute and 36 seconds to make the edit, triple that of your logic. Even assuming that he'd be in the middle of the minute at 11:36:30, that would still be 1 minute and 7 seconds to go.

YOU based your fussy logic based on him making editing his post right at the start of the minute.

Trust me, 1 minute 36 seconds is plenty of time to consider developments and make such a small edit.

Edit: I must of course admit that I am not completely unbiased in this as his accusation was a mirror on my own, but hey, no one is perfect.

This is by no means a condemnation of them, but I think The Red Snifit, and BlueWhirl are suspicious persons. I have others on my mind but you two jump out the most. And it's not even because you both voted me.

Actually, for me, it seems you two are working in collusion with one another. I know for a fact something is up between you two and it is not good for the bystanders.

I admit to playing dangerously, but as we can see now, the mafia is going to play hide and seek until they find the thug. I want to hit them before they hit us. There are only 8 real bystanders since I put the thug in with mafia. That gives us a 2:1 ratio of B:M.

If the mafia finds the thug before we find a mafia member, then it'll be extremely difficult to climb out of that hole. I think we should focus on you two because in my honest opinion you are both extremely suspicious characters.

CJM was inactive last round, yes. There is no need to involve an extra weight that cannot attend the party when it starts.
Sanky, not so much. One post during the accusation phase > no post at all. He'll be around.
TRS and BlueWhirl, I will refrain from voting towards until further evidence does thus get presented.

Originally posted by The Red SnifitIf our players can't be bothered to come up with a good reason for their accusations while everybody jumps on them anyway, then we are in a situation where chaos is supreme and manipulation by the Mafia is inevitable.

Or we could be in a situation where the Mafia tells the sheep (bystanders) to calm the fuck down while they take role.

I didn't really say anything for the rest of the first round because I though we should wait for the next round before voting somebody off, and in the end, it came to a no-kill anyway. Seems like the mafia has opted for the same strategy as Round 8, though.
I hate to bandwagon, but CJMiller really should reply. It worked to me, at least. Not voting for him in the final voting if he replies.
TRS and, by extension, BlueWhirl raise valid points.. However, due to what she had told me last round, I'm not sure if I'm going to trust Snowdeath. While it obviously was a joke, its purpose might have been to make us think she's not the Godfather.
I'm going to throw a weak Snowdeath here, but I'll change it if something more reliable comes up.Never mind, I just found the log. Nothing was implied; turns out I completely misinterpreted the conversation. Don't mind me.
Still suspicious a bit, though.

Originally posted by legacyme3Actually, for me, it seems you two are working in collusion with one another. I know for a fact something is up between you two and it is not good for the bystanders.

I find it very suspicious that you're making false claims while acting so sure that they're true, especially when you don't bother to present any evidence to support them.

I can only guess what your intentions are, but once again, you seem like you want to be accused, so I'll set this aside this time.

It seems that the main focus now is CJMiller, but it looks pretty clear that he doesn't intend to participate in this round. He probably doesn't have a special role, and if he does, this playing style, or lack thereof, is going to get him killed before the round ends anyway.

Instead of killing him off now and giving the Mafia another free round to investigate, let's try and find somebody who could actually be a threat to us first.

Sanky, in particular, has exhibited some pretty typical Mafia behavior. First, he tries to slip under the radar by posting as few times as he can get away with. Then, he jumps the moment somebody mentions his name and then makes a bandwagon vote, trying to look as "normal" as possible.

Sanky looks like he has something to hide, while CJMiller looks like he doesn't. Between the two, I think it should be pretty clear who we should be voting off.